Robustness and Overcoming Brittleness of AI-Enabled Legal Micro-Directives: The Role of Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2009.02243v1
• Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2020 05:09:03 GMT
• Title: Robustness and Overcoming Brittleness of AI-Enabled Legal Micro-Directives: The Role of Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning
• Authors: Lance Eliot
• Abstract summary: Recent research suggests that the law might inevitably be transformed into legal micro-directives consisting of legal rules that are derived from legal standards. This paper examines and extends the legal micro-directives theories in three crucial respects.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Recent research by legal scholars suggests that the law might inevitably be transformed into legal micro-directives consisting of legal rules that are derived from legal standards or that are otherwise produced automatically or via the consequent derivations of legal goals and then propagated via automation for everyday use as readily accessible lawful directives throughout society. This paper examines and extends the legal micro-directives theories in three crucial respects: (1) By indicating that legal micro-directives are likely to be AI-enabled and evolve over time in scope and velocity across the autonomous levels of AI Legal Reasoning, (2) By exploring the trade-offs between legal standards and legal rules as the imprinters of the micro-directives, and (3) By illuminating a set of brittleness exposures that can undermine legal micro-directives and proffering potential mitigating remedies to seek greater robustness in the instantiation and promulgation of such AI-powered lawful directives.

Related papers

• Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
  This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
• The Ethics of Automating Legal Actors [58.81546227716182]
  We argue that automating the role of the judge raises difficult ethical challenges, in particular for common law legal systems. Our argument follows from the social role of the judge in actively shaping the law, rather than merely applying it. Even in the case the models could achieve human-level capabilities, there would still be remaining ethical concerns inherent in the automation of the legal process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-01T13:48:46Z)
• The risks of risk-based AI regulation: taking liability seriously [46.90451304069951]
  The development and regulation of AI seems to have reached a critical stage. Some experts are calling for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This paper analyses the most advanced legal proposal, the European Union's AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:51:37Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
• Lawformer: A Pre-trained Language Model for Chinese Legal Long Documents [56.40163943394202]
  We release the Longformer-based pre-trained language model, named as Lawformer, for Chinese legal long documents understanding. We evaluate Lawformer on a variety of LegalAI tasks, including judgment prediction, similar case retrieval, legal reading comprehension, and legal question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-09T09:39:25Z)
• Legal Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining (LSAOM): Assimilating Advances in Autonomous AI Legal Reasoning [0.0]
  Legal Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining (LSAOM) consists of two often intertwined phenomena and actions underlying legal discussions and narratives. Efforts to undertake LSAOM have historically been performed by human hand and cognition. Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) involving especially Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Machine Learning (ML) are bolstering how automation can systematically perform either or both of Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-02T04:15:21Z)
• AI and Legal Argumentation: Aligning the Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning [0.0]
  Legal argumentation is a vital cornerstone of justice, underpinning an adversarial form of law. Extensive research has attempted to augment or undertake legal argumentation via the use of computer-based automation including Artificial Intelligence (AI) An innovative meta-approach is proposed to apply the Levels of Autonomy (LoA) of AI Legal Reasoning to the maturation of AI and Legal Argumentation (AILA)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-11T22:05:40Z)
• An Impact Model of AI on the Principles of Justice: Encompassing the Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning [0.0]
  It is argued that the infusion of AI into existing and future legal activities and the judicial structure needs to be undertaken by mindfully observing an alignment with the core principles of justice. By examining the principles of justice across the Levels of Autonomy (LoA) of AI Legal Reasoning, the case is made that there is an ongoing tension underlying the efforts to develop and deploy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-26T22:56:41Z)
• Authorized and Unauthorized Practices of Law: The Role of Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning [0.0]
  The legal field has sought to define Authorized Practices of Law (APL) versus Unauthorized Practices of Law (UPL) This paper explores a newly derived instrumental grid depicting the key characteristics underlying APL and UPL as they apply to the AILR autonomous levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-19T18:35:58Z)
• An Ontological AI-and-Law Framework for the Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning [0.0]
  A framework is proposed that seeks to identify and establish a set of robust autonomous levels articulating the realm of Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning. A set of seven levels of autonomy for AI and Legal Reasoning are meticulously proffered and mindfully discussed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-04T16:12:30Z)
• How Does NLP Benefit Legal System: A Summary of Legal Artificial Intelligence [81.04070052740596]
  Legal Artificial Intelligence (LegalAI) focuses on applying the technology of artificial intelligence, especially natural language processing, to benefit tasks in the legal domain. This paper introduces the history, the current state, and the future directions of research in LegalAI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-25T14:45:15Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.